Still here: The teenage app tycoons

What a shame the guy in the first example's work didn't meet it's full potential for him! Maybe he should do the same kind of app for Android phones where innovation isn't stifled!

Horay for young entrepreneurialism, still alive and well!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I like the smug arrogance of apple, thinking that anyone who writes a decent applictaion must surely be wanting to go work at apple. What is the part of 'entrepreneur' that these guys don't get?
I make games for a living, on windows, at home on my own. I have ZERO interest in working for anyone else, and ZERO interest in making games for any of the 'closed' platforms owned by apple. Windows is far superior because ANYONE can write software for it without having to grovel and be 'approved' by a bunch of self appoinetd dictators in california.
Long live Windows.
BTW not everyone doing this sort of stuff is a 'whizz kid' teenager. I'm 40.

The first guy may of earned 20k, but i bet Apple won't give him a job any more... But as Adrian Moore quite rightly says, not everyone wants to be part of Apple's world dominating antics

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Apple have a de facto monopoly on the development and sale of third party software via their app store. While they may skirt around the legal definition of a monopoly because people somehow continue to have a choice not to buy their products they are really not doing themselves any favours in the long run and at some point they will over step the mark and be pulled up before one regulator or another. But even if they were required to be more open it still wouldn't pursuade me to buy their rather over priced products.

All that said of course, neither Nokia or RIM or Google are any more open. Mmm, perhaps a cartel rather than a monopoly in play here.... Cosy arrangements anyone ?

I know of Greg Hughes - better wake up at Microsoft et al - this guy is exceptionally bright you'd better have him working for you because the opposite doesn't bear thinking about.

@thirstylocket - did you really make that ipubquiz game? I swear i was playing that today on my mates ipod. Top notch game!!

"I make games for a living, on windows, at home on my own. I have ZERO interest in working for anyone else, and ZERO interest in making games for any of the 'closed' platforms owned by apple. Windows is far superior because ANYONE can write software for it without having to grovel and be 'approved' by a bunch of self appoinetd dictators in california.
Long live Windows."

You do realise this has nothing to do with a desktop OS right? Like windows, OSX isn't a closed platform. We're talking about a mobile phone (which in 99% of cases is a closed platform), comparing it to windows is irrelivant.

There's nothing strange here, and for the sake of usability and the future of computing, I hope windows dies soon.

@Dougall - Wow, thanks! Yes , I wrote that game. Its really encouraging to know people are enjoying it - spurs me on to write the next one!!

Its always good to hear about people who make it in the world with a lucky break. However, I don't like Apple's constant need to close everything on the iPhone down. Android phones give you a choice as to whether you want to use the store or download from anywhere. Perhaps if he were to extend his app to other platforms. I can see wireless syncing being very useful on a Blackberry for people who use the phone for work.

I can't help but laugh at all the anti-Apple rants above (I presume mainly from Windows users who are missing out). All Apple are doing is deciding what they have for sale in their store - exactly the same as every retailer in the world. You can't walk into Waterstones and say "Here, I've written this book and you have to buy it otherwise your somehow stifling creativity!"
As Steve jobs pointed out, if you're not happy with Apple don't buy the products, but at the end of the day the reason people will continue to do so is that they are vastly superior in useability, performance and reliability to most alternatives. They innovate and others follow. Ideally they would be more open source, but while they're ahead of the game I don't think they will need to change too much.

dudescousemonkey - the argument "they're just deciding what to allow in their own store" is often made, but the point it misses is that their store is the only realistic way to get apps onto the iPhone. I think a lot of people genuinely don't realise this and imagine, for example, that you can download apps from websites. But you can't, unless you're one of the few people who have jailbroken their phone.

I'm really surprised there hasn't been more fuss about this. It's like selling a computer which can only run programs approved by Microsoft, or selling car which can only drive to places approved by Ford. Granted, most mobile platforms are closed to some extent, but Apple is the worst offender and deserves to be held to account.

Compounding the problem, it's almost universally agreed that Apple's review process is capricious, unpredictable and illogical. It's lovely to hear these heartwarming stories about teenagers who have made it big, but it would be nice to see a bit of journalistic attention given to the other side of the coin - the people who have put months of their life into an app which Apple rejects, and Apple's complete unwillingness to engage in any debate about their reasons.

This whole area is much discussed in tech blogs - as Rory, of course, will know - but it's a shame it hasn't been explained and exposed more widely by the likes of the BBC.

(For the record, yes, I'm an app developer and no, I'm not bitter; I love my iPhone, and I've never had an app rejected by Apple. But I don't like having this Sword of Damocles over my head, and it's always at the back of my mind that one day it fall on me.)

It's funny how any peripheral mention brings out the same old Apple-bashing. If they weren't producing such lovely devices, I don't suppose there would be the jealousy.

@adrian moore: Apple recognised a smart guy and wanted to recruit him. How is that arrogant?

@Richard: "It's like selling a computer which can only run programs approved by Microsoft" - you mean like most games consoles? Where has Apple advertised that the iPhone will run anything, or even that it is a computer?

Most iPhone buyers are going to be happy to have a trouble free means to buy from 100,000's of Apps, with some minimal quality control to ensure they don't trash the phone or the battery. Developer's have the choice to develop for the iPhone or walk away and develop for some other platform. If enough developers walk away to starve the App Store Apple would be forced to address the process.

The App Store approval process may introduce risk, but the App Store also provides the opportunity to address a far larger audience than the alternatives. I don't see that Apple owes you anything.

re Peter Galbavy at 8:
All that said of course, neither Nokia or RIM or Google are any more open.

Nokia are considerably more open; both both Symbian and Maemo OSes are (more or less) open source, and neither is locked to a single App Store in the way that iPhones are; you can write whatever you want and sell it to whoever you want, however you want.

re dudescousemonkey at 14:
All Apple are doing is deciding what they have for sale in their store - exactly the same as every retailer in the world.

That's not all they're doing. They're doing that, AND they're stopping you shopping at any other retailers. That's plainly a very different thing.

The thing that most strikes me about this isn't just that both developers and users are getting a bad deal, it's the sheer dismissiveness of Apple's attitude - the wireless sync sounds like it would be rather useful; Apple's response? "Ha! No chance!", even though they acknowledge that the app is a good one.

Greg has hit the nail on the head when he states Apple are stifling innovation. If Apple carry on restricting developers in such a way it's going to do more harm than good to the iPhone.

To put the whole thing in perspective, just ask yourself this question: "Would Windows have been successful if Microsoft restricted developers like Apple are restricting iPhone developers today?".

I'm sure developers agree that Apple have got the whole idea wrong and I know for certain that Paul Graham (the founder of Viaweb, which is now Yahoo! Stores) agrees.

On a happier note, I'm glad to see that young individuals have found success on such up-and-coming platforms. I'd love to be able to develop applications for smart phones in the future.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Just a couple of points to make:

1. It is not illegal to have a monopoly. It is, however, illegal to abuse your position as a monopoly. I fail to see how Apple are abusing their position, especially as so many complainers on here state that other companies stores are better than Apples. So quite clearly there are other options. Remember people, no one is forcing you to buy an iPhone.

2. I don't understand this attitude that Apple are "stifling innovation". Ever since 3rd Party Developers have been able to write Apps, Apple have consistently updated their developer tools to allow more access and more APIs for devs to hook into.

In my opinion, Apple are doing this right. Slowly but surely introducing new features and APIs that they know will work, and work well.

Remember this: Rome wasn't built in a day.

And finally I'll leave you with this:

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

Theodore Roosevelt,
April 23, 1910.

my friend and I are teen app developers with two apps currently on the AppStore. "Tap to Kill", a game and "The Most Useful Soundboard" both have done pretty well, although we haven't done as well as this guy. Were gonna release some more apps over the summer that we hope will launch of. "Brick Breaker for Iphone", "Doodle Car Race" and "Popalicious" will definitely be released and hopefully some others.

@GrumblyGumby: First of all, as someone who's very happy using a Windows laptop and an Apple iPhone, I'm always amused how polarized these debates become. Anything positive anyone says about Apple is always slapped down as "fanboy!", whereas anything negative is dismissed as "jealousy!" I don't understand why we can't accept that there are pros and cons to almost everything in this world. But 'twas ever thus with Apple...

More substantively, if you think that what we're talking about here is "some minimal quality control", then you've never experienced the process nor read any of the reams of comment on it you can find on the Internet. If the process were predictable and (mostly) fair then the only people who complained about it would be the ones who'd tried to push the envelope. But witness the fact that I, and many others who have experienced only success going through the review procedure, still hate it with a passion. There's something wrong there.

Your most interesting point though is the argument that developers could just walk away. That's perfectly true, but it's the same level of analysis as saying that farmers could walk away from Tesco if they don't like the prices they're being paid. We all know that doesn't work, really. Right now, this is a market with one all-powerful player and a huge number of very weak ones; which is a classic recipe for controversy and ultimately, often, intervention.

Oh, and yes, it's very like games consoles. The fact that someone else does something is never much of a justification for doing it too.

@Richard:
My reference to "same old Apple-bashing" was in really in reference to comments like "over priced products" or that they were "smugly arrogant" for wanting to recruit a smart kid.

By minimal QC I refer to the app purchaser's perspective, not the developers. I am well aware how unsatisfactory the approval process is for individual developers. It seems to me that Apple needs a continued supply of high quality applications and will fine tune their process to ensure it continues.

I am not clear on what you are arguing for - continuation of an approval process with more clarity on the rules or no approval process or a complete free-for-all on app downloads?

I think we've just about run our course, but I've been asked a question so I'll post one last message... I think Apple could do two things, either of which would be entirely reasonable.

First, they could fix up their broken procedure (a task which is clearly much easier to describe than to do, though by all accounts the first step would be just to spend a bit more money on it). That would mean making the rules less arbitrary, training their people to apply them better, having proper feedback mechanisms, providing some kind of appeal process, and generally putting in the kinds of checks and balances you ought to have when you're exercising such dictatorial control. If they did that, then most developers wouldn't have an objection to the App Store - not least because the commercial terms they offer are really very good.

The second option is to keep their own system as capricious and chaotic as they want, but provide some other way to get apps onto the iPhone (without resorting to jailbreaking). The market would then decide... and I'm pretty confident in saying that the market would have created some viable alternatives, considering how much bad feeling there is against the App Store right now.

But instead of either of these, what they're doing is to control the only means of distribution *and* run it in a way which has alienated most of the community. I personally think it's a bizarre kind of incompetence rather than an evil master-plan, but it's not surprising some people see more sinister motives - after all, if Apple can design such great products, surely they could design a halfway workable review process?

BUYER BEWARE - Do NOT expect ANY support from Greg Hughes if you encounter any problems with his Wi-Fi Sync software. I purchased the Windows version of Greg’s Wi-Fi Sync software and attempted to install on several PC’s with the same results “application failed to start”. I submitted a friendly trouble ticket on Greg’s support site over a month ago and Greg has made NO attempt to respond. A second trouble ticket also went unanswered as did a request for a refund. PayPal will only assist if the software was purchased via EBay, not Cydia. Jay Freeman of Cydia also didn’t respond to my email requesting assistance. BUYER BEWARE!